This section covers a variety of topics for staff and faculty, including hiring and annual performance reviews. The policies of the College of Arts and Sciences do not supersede the policies of Seattle University.
This document provides an outline for a chair conducting a search for an administrative assistant.
Contact Lisa Ferrin with questions.
Staff Performance Evaluation policy and procedures are established by Human Resources. An overview of the Performance Evaluation procedures and schedule is available here.
For questions about procedures within the context of the College of Arts and Sciences, contact the A&S Academic Program Manager, Lisa Ferrin.
The Chairs of departments are responsible for developing the faculty, reviewing and revising the curricula, and managing the resources of their departments. In discharging these responsibilities, Chairs assume many duties including the following:
In recognition of the time needed to fulfill these responsibilities, Chairs are provided released time from teaching and a modest stipend. The term of office for a Chair is three years and may be extended for another term or terms after consultation with the department and approval of the Dean.
The Dean will ask the department to choose a colleague to chair the process for selecting the next chair; that person must not be the present chair.
The department will first discuss the needs of the department, guided, in part, by the criteria on the chair's annual evaluation form.
Volunteers will be solicited, among whom the present chair may be included.
The candidate(s) should leave the room while discussion takes place about the merits of the candidate(s).
All tenured or tenure-track members of the department may vote.
A written vote should be taken, the results tabulated by the chair of the process, and the results forwarded to the Dean.
(Source: A&S Dean’s Office, 9/11/19)
(Source: A&S Dean’s Office, 9/11/19)
Complete these two exercises and and be prepared to share written outcomes from that process with the Dean as part of your request. Download this document. It includes two exercises:
Information from on-campus trainings are available on the Office of Diversity and Inclusion website.
Materials on implicit bias in search practices
It is College policy to include in your deliberations a consultant from another department and to allow the consultant a vote in the hiring recommendation. It is also College policy to have all tenure-track and tenured members of the department vote on the hiring recommendation.
College policy holds that some means other than the use of written evidence should be used to ascertain the effectiveness of a candidate's teaching and that the views of students should be sought in some way, such as feedback from a demonstration of teaching or an interview of the candidate.
All candidate files and materials generated by the search committee should be kept for five years following the search. This includes screen criteria notes, evaluations, etc. The applicant file is retained online.
The dean's office will request from each department a list of anticipated faculty searches for the upcoming academic year. Once approval for the search has been granted, the Dean's Office will reimburse to each department funds equal to the total of a per-search rate of $5,000 for a multi-year hire and the number of upcoming searches.
If a department anticipates that it will spend more than the amount allotted, please contact the Budget Manager. Unless otherwise noted, the department will be responsible for funding the difference. In cases involving diversity initiatives or other special needs, additional funding may be negotiated between the chair and dean.
If candidates incur any expense not paid for directly by the department or program (I.e. Silver Cloud hotel stay), they must supply the hiring department printed or electronic receipts and a W-9 in order to be reimbursed.
Typical expenses incurred by a candidate that require receipts include airport transfers and meals not included in hotel stay.
If candidates stay at the Silver Cloud Hotel, please ask for the Seattle University rate.
The following summarizes faculty hiring procedures for all part-time faculty positions in the College of Arts and Sciences. University faculty hiring procedures may be found here. The appropriate divisional associate dean oversees part-time non-tenure track hires.
Part-time faculty are paid at the current college per course rate dependent on their degree.
There are several faculty designations covered in the Faculty Handbook. Descriptions of each can be found in the Faculty Handbook (starting on pg. 16). In most cases, the designation of Lecturer the appropriate one. If the department seeks a different designation, prior approval from the divisional associate dean needs to be secured.
Faculty Designations:
Lecturer
Research Faculty
Other Faculty
Special Status Faculty
In the College of Arts & Sciences, there is a three-part process for hiring any part-time faculty:
Determining Need
Chairs or directors are responsible for understanding historical trends, current enrollment and faculty resources, and predicting (to a reasonable extent) course need. The Dean, Budget Manager and Associate Dean provide further assistance in helping determine need. As most departments in the college have substantial need for part-time faculty, it is better to keep in mind longer term need and use the annual budget process as a template for articulating faculty resource needs.
NOTE: The University is currently updating its data tools, which will greatly help in providing department, college, and university data. At this time, PowerBi is the main tool where chairs/directors can or soon will be able to access relevant data.
Securing Approvals
The Dean holds final authority for approval of all part-time hires. Chair/directors should consult first with the divisional Associate Dean for longer range perspective on current college need. The college Budget Manager is an invaluable resource for understanding departmental resources and whether additional resources will be needed. In the case of unplanned hires inform the appropriate Associate Dean and Budget Manager as soon as possible.
NOTE: Only in rare cases will approval be given for overloading current FT faculty to fill need. [See Faculty Handbook, pg. 41 following]
Hiring
After approval to hire has been secured, Chair/director proceeds to find a suitable Lecturer to cover the curricular needs. It is advised that Chairs/directors, as hiring managers, keep in mind the principles for hiring FT TT and NTT faculty regarding inclusivity, bias reduction, educational level and experience.
If the position is to be advertised, the Chair/director must determine costs and seek additional funding through the Associate Dean and Budget Manager if needed.
Part-time faculty or adjuncts are those faculty who teach 4/7ths (0.57 FTE) or less over fall, winter and spring. Faculty who teach at 0.50FTE or more are entitled to certain additional benefits determined by Human Resources. The salary rate for adjunct faculty is determined on a per-course basis.
Note: the policies of the College of Arts and Sciences are a supplement to and do not supercede the policies of Seattle University. Please review the Faculty Handbook and the University Rank and Tenure File Preparation Guidelines in Academic Affairs Faculty Policies and Procedures
All full time faculty participate in a yearly process of review conducted by the Chairs of their departments. The process requires that faculty use the Annual Professional Review form.
For full time tenure, tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty: 2nd Monday of February
For department chairs: 3rd Monday of February
Please note that these are the dates for APRs to be turned in to the Dean’s Executive Assistant in electronic form who then forwards to the appropriate divisional Associate Deans. Due dates to department chairs are set by individual chairs.
Syllabi, course materials, and, where appropriate or required, the conducting of classes, should be peer-reviewed by methods approved in the College. The Arts and Sciences student evaluations, which are required for all classes, should also be reviewed. The professional review must include the teaching of Core classes for those faculty teaching in the Core, and these classes must be reviewed according to Core as well as departmental criteria.
In the course of reviewing their performance for the past calendar year, faculty should also discuss their plans for scholarly development or research, the development of new courses, needs for institutional support and the like. Based on these meetings, the Chair will inform the Dean of the state of the department and the faculty and will make requests for institutional support.
NOTE: Only those faculty who participate in the process of the annual review will be eligible to receive an increase in salary. The Faculty professional review form is also used for the purpose of allocating performance-based salary increases The forms for the use of tenured / tenure-track and full-time non tenure-track faculty are available from the Dean's office or at the following link:.
The review of faculty in the first year toward tenure replaces the process of the annual review for that year. NOTE: the Annual Professional Review form is included with all materials required for the third year review file.
Faculty on a full year's sabbatical will report on their sabbatical in the Fall quarter of their return to the Dean and the Provost, as required by the Faculty Handbook (11.4.e,). This report replaces the Annual Professional Review for the calendar year during which two or more quarters of the sabbatical occurred. For example, a report on a sabbatical taken for a full year in AY 2005-2006 will count as the Annual Professional Review in January, 2007. Faculty who take only a one-quarter's sabbatical in any given year will complete the Annual Professional Review as usual.
The following is a summary of Rank and Tenure university policies and guidelines and a description of college policies and guidelines. All candidates for rank and tenure are expected to familiarize themselves with and follow University policies and guidelines as well as college policies and guidelines. General University policies pertaining to faculty are found on Academic Affairs site. Standards for tenure and promotion found in the faculty handbook articulate the minimal standards for rank and tenure and apply across all programs and colleges at Seattle University. In cases where a department has established guidelines for promotion, which have been approved by the dean and provost, consultation with the chair will be especially important. The timeline for file submission is set out by the college and is consistent with college and university policy for tenure and promotion to associate professor and promotion to professor.
In July 2022, updates to the Faculty Handbook were approved by the Board of Trustees. These updates expand the university’s definition of scholarship and creative work. The Faculty Handbook states: (2022: III.B. p. 7) “Scholarship is defined broadly to include basic research, the integration of knowledge, the transformation of knowledge through the intellectual work involved in teaching and facilitating learning, and the application of knowledge to solve a compelling problem in the community. Seattle University values an inclusive view of scholarship in the recognition that knowledge is acquired and advanced through discovery, integration, application, teaching, and engagement. Given this perspective, promotion and tenure reviews, as detailed in the criteria of individual departments, schools, and colleges, will recognize original research contributions in peer-reviewed publications as well as integrative and applied forms of scholarship that involve cross-cutting collaborations with business and community partners, including translational research”.
A non-exhaustive list of a range of possible areas of scholarly activity follows this statement. Please review this section of the faculty handbook (III.B) thoroughly as it provides all candidates for tenure and promotion with a broad overview of SU’s understanding of what constitutes scholarship.
To the extent that faculty are involved in graduate education, the university expects faculty “give special attention to the production of scholarly research and writing and/or engagement in professional activities that contribute to the growth of knowledge or to professional excellence in fields external to the University,” (pp. 6-7).
Key Documents:
It is recommended that all new faculty meet with their department chairs to review both the College and University guidelines and to establish a timeline for progress toward rank and tenure.
In addition to the Year-One-Through-Seven expanded timeline below, all tenure- track faculty will complete APRs every year, in accordance with the APR guidelines, except during the first contract year. Please note that APRs are included in both the mid-probationary and tenure and promotion files.
Promotion to the rank of professor follows similar processes as those for tenure and promotion to associate professor. See details on the following pages and in the Faculty Handbook.
The tenure-track timeline found here provides assistant professors with a simple chart of important due dates and elements needed as they progress toward application for tenure and promotion. A similar timeline for applicants for promotion to Full Professor can be found here.
New faculty are reviewed by means of a letter from their Chair at the end of the academic year. Please note, that in the situation where there is an acting chair or director, that person writes this letter. In rare cases the Dean’s designee will write this letter.
The chairperson's letter should be submitted to the appropriate divisional Dean by the 3rd Friday in June. The chair’s first-year letter will be included in the faculty member’s file at the time of the third-year review.
In preparation for the chair’s review, faculty are asked to submit a one- to two-page self-evaluation on teaching, scholarship, and service, along with a list or table of teaching, scholarly, and service activities performed during the year.
This list or table should include the following:
Chairs are encouraged to help new faculty to keep service commitments, including academic advising, to a minimum during the first year. Departments are encouraged to conduct a formative review at some point during the first year.
No summative peer reviews of teaching are mandated. For definitions of summative and formative reviews, please see Difference between Formative and Summative Assessment of Teaching.
Formative reviews go to individual faculty. Formative reviews, including those done through the Collegium, should NOT be included in 3rd year probationary or tenure files.
For the purposes of the tenure process, faculty must have at least two summative peer reviews of teaching completed prior to the mid-probationary Review (typically during the second year). Faculty may choose to have a third summative review completed this year. If they do not, the third summative review must be completed during the fall of Year Three. Faculty may have the same course section evaluated more than once within a given quarter, but only one of these summative peer reviews may count towards the required number (as noted by URTC, p. 6).
The Executive Committee and the Dean have approved a form to be used for summative peer reviews, available at the following link:
For further details on the Peer Review process, see section titled “Peer Review of Teaching” below.
In the candidate’s mid-probationary review year (typically, year three) the candidate must submit a file following tenure and promotion guidelines set out by the University Rank & Tenure Committee (URTC).
By the second Friday after winter quarter classes start, the candidate’s mid-probationary review file and the department’s evaluation are submitted to the Dean’s Office. This means that the faculty member must submit this file to the department by a prior deadline established by the department chair. Please consult with your department chair for deadlines.
At least three summative peer reviews of teaching must be included. No formative peer reviews of teaching should be included. See guidelines for peer reviews of teaching below and URTC Covid-19 statement. After the departmental review committee reviews the faculty file and completes its evaluation, a department representative (tenured) summarizes the department's recommendation in a letter to the College Rank and Tenure Committee; this letter should be signed by the entire committee and include minority reports when these exist.
In accordance with URTC File Preparation Guidelines, the Chair writes a separate letter with their recommendations (see URTC, p.3, for guidelines on chair letters). The College Rank and Tenure Committee reviews the file to assess the faculty member’s teaching, scholarship, and service, and makes recommendations to the Dean. The Dean and faculty member meet to discuss the Committee and departmental comments sometime in late February or early March. All letters and recommendations (departmental, College Rank & Tenure Committee, Dean) are sent on to the Provost’s Office for review. The Provost makes final decisions concerning continuation of the appointment, upon authority delegated by the President.
Once faculty submit the third-year file to the Dean, they may apply for a one quarter pre-tenure Junior Faculty Professional Development Grant. Please refer to the Policy and Application on the Academic Affairs website for details on this application. It should be noted that the pre-tenure sabbatical represents a release from all teaching and service obligations (departmental, college, and university level), for the sole purpose of pre-tenure scholarship.
Between the mid-probationary review year and the tenure review year (typically years four and five), faculty must have three additional summative reviews completed in the two years before applying for tenure; that is, during years four and five. Faculty may have the same course section evaluated more than once within a given quarter, but only one of these summative peer reviews may count towards the required number.
In late winter quarter prior to submission of one’s file for tenure and promotion, faculty also prepare for an external review of scholarship/creative work and submit a list of eight potential external reviewers to their department chairperson (please see External Reviews of Scholarship for full details).
Summative Peer Reviews of classes are especially important for providing a perspective on a teacher's competence not available from the Student Evaluation forms. The Executive Committee and the Dean have approved this form to be used for summative peer reviews.
Classes must be peer reviewed according to the guidelines of the College's Peer Review form and the procedures of one's department.
NOTE: Peer reviews that are to be part of the record must be authorized by the chair, whose signature on the peer review indicates that it has been accepted as part of the record.
College of Arts and Sciences Schedule of Peer Reviews for tenure track faculty:
Year Three: Three summative reviews required by FALL of Year Three.
Year Five: Three summative reviews required (from years four and five) by SPRING of Year Five.
For Promotion only: at least three peer evaluations from the two years preceding the application.
The following is an excerpt from the URTC Rank & Tenure File Preparations Guidelines.
Section II.E., pg. 4: External Letters: At least three evaluations from peers outside the university who can speak to the quality and significance of the candidate’s scholarly work are required. External evaluators will be chosen according to the guidelines of the individual school or college, solicited by a representative of the dean’s office and made available in the electronic file for reviewers. C.V.’s for external reviewers do not need to be placed in the electronic file, but should be available upon request. The URTC advises that the credibility of the external evaluation is directly linked to the independence of the evaluator. The role of external evaluators should be to assess the significance of the candidate’s scholarship within the standards of the discipline. External evaluators should be provided with materials outlining Seattle University and the applicable school/college policies and expectations for scholarship, but should not be asked to explicitly assess candidates according to these standards. External reviewers should not be asked to comment on teaching or service.
Creative Work for Tenure and/or Promotion to Associate Professor
In the College of Arts and Sciences, candidates for tenure and/or promotion to associate professor are required by the College to provide three evaluations from peers outside the university which can speak to the quality and significance of the candidate’s scholarly/creative work.
If the nature of the work is scholarship:
Candidates for tenure and/or promotion to Associate Professor are asked to submit a list of eight names of potential external reviewers to their department chairpersons, using the electronic form listed below. For each name, the candidate should indicate briefly the professional qualifications of the potential reviewer and describe any personal or professional relationship between the reviewer and the candidate. Candidates are encouraged to rank order their preferences on this list. The chairperson may consult with other tenured members of the department concerning the list of reviewers and may propose additional names. The final list of reviewers, including how they are ranked, will be selected by the chairperson.
When the list of external reviewers has been finalized by the chair, the Associate Dean for Social Sciences will write to request their services. Three completed external review letters are required for tenure and promotion (per URTC). External reviewers will be offered an honorarium for their assistance and it will be explained that their participation and letters of review are confidential to the fullest extent permitted by law. When the external reviewers have agreed to participate, they will be sent copies of the candidate’s scholarly work (a representative selection of the candidate’s work made jointly by the candidate and the department chairperson) along with a copy of the University and College written standards of scholarship for tenure and promotion to associate professor. Along with the scholarship samples, the candidate has the option of submitting a statement describing the nature and context of their work.
The letter to potential external reviewers asks that they write an assessment of the candidate's creative works or research and scholarship, through a submitted representative sample of their written work. The following text from the Faculty Handbook is also included:
Timetable for External Reviews of Scholarship:
March 1
Mar 15
1st Monday in September
If the nature of the work is creative (e.g., in the visual or performing arts):
Candidate must document evidence of creative achievement and professional activity as well as promise of continued creative development. This work must include at least one presentation or performance for a recognized arts organization (theatre, gallery) off campus. Two types of review are required:
Associate Dean Kevin Krycka is available to answer candidates' questions about these guidelines confidentially.
Candidates for promotion to professor are required by university policy to provide "at least three evaluations from peers outside the university which can speak to the quality and significance of the candidate's scholarly work."
If the nature of the work is scholarship:
Candidates for promotion to professor are asked to submit a list of six to eight names of potential external reviewers to their department chairpersons. For each name, the candidate should indicate briefly the professional qualifications of the potential reviewer and describe any personal or professional relationship between the reviewer and the candidate. Candidates may rank order their preferences on this list. The chairperson may consult with other tenured members of the department concerning the list of reviewers and may propose additional names. The final list of reviewers will be selected by the chairperson.
When the list of external reviewers has been chosen, the Associate Dean will write to request their services. Three letters from external reviewers are required per URTC. External reviewers will be offered an honorarium for their assistance and it will be explained that their participation and letters of review are confidential to the fullest extent permitted by law. When the external reviewers have agreed to participate, they will be sent copies of the candidate’s scholarly work (a representative selection of the candidate’s work made jointly by the candidate and the department chairperson) along with a copy of the University and College written standards of scholarship for promotion to professor. Along with the scholarship samples, the candidate has the option of submitting a statement describing the nature and context of their work.
The letter to potential external reviewers asks that they write an assessment of the candidate's creative works or research and scholarship, based upon a review of the candidate’s submitted representative sample of their written work. The following text from the Faculty Handbook is also included:
If the nature of the work is creative (e.g., in the visual or performing arts):
Candidate must document evidence of creative achievement and professional activity as well as promise of continued creative development. This work must include at least one presentation or performance for a recognized arts organization (theatre, gallery) off campus. Two types of review are required:
Along with either samples of individual creative works or a portfolio of creative works, the candidate has the option of submitting a statement describing the nature and context of their work. The chairperson may consult with other tenured members of the department concerning the list of reviewers and may propose additional names. The final list of reviewers will be selected by the chairperson and sent to Associate Dean Krycka by March 20.
Timetable for External Reviews of Scholarship & Creative Works:
March 1
Mar 15
1st Monday in September
The faculty member's tenure file must be prepared according to the University's criteria and ready for review by the departmental review committee at the latest by the 2nd Monday in September. (Some departments hold their review at the end of Spring quarter in year five.) According to the Faculty Handbook (section VI.B, pg. 22), “the minimum size of a departmental personnel review committee shall be three tenured faculty members. If the department does not have three qualified tenured members who can form the personnel review committee, the personnel review committee of the relevant school or college, in consultation with the Dean of the relevant school or college, shall appoint sufficient additional tenured faculty members of the school or college to fulfill the minimum size of three persons.”
After the departmental review committee determines its recommendation concerning tenure and votes, a department representative (tenured) summarizes the department's recommendation in a letter to the College Rank and Tenure Committee; this letter should be signed by the entire committee and include minority reports when these exist. The Chair writes a separate letter with their recommendations.
The file should then be brought to the Dean's office by the first Monday in October. The College's Rank and Tenure Committee will review all files and make recommendations by Thanksgiving to the Dean who, in turn, will submit the files to the Provost's office by December 1st. The dean will also provide a written summary of their own recommendation and the reasons for that recommendation to the candidate. In forming their own recommendation, the dean shall give due weight and appropriate consideration to the recommendation of the Departmental and College Review Committees.
Faculty in the College of Arts and Sciences are asked to use these resources to organize their promotion and tenure files, in order to facilitate the work of the review committees.
The Faculty Handbook and Rank and Tenure File Preparation Guidelines can be found in Academic Affairs Policy and Procedures.
Updates to the guidelines presented on this page were approved by the Arts and Sciences Executive Committee May of 2013.
All courses in the College of Arts and Sciences are to be evaluated using the standard student evaluation form for the College. Toward the end of the quarter, the Dean's office distributes electronic evaluation forms to the students registered in each class After the evaluations have been tabulated by the Dean’s office the faculty member and Chair receive the entire evaluation (both the numerical summary and written comments) for review and for the departmental record.
When compiling a file for promotion and/or tenure, faculty are required to include the original student comments and responses as well as the summary results for each class.
Download the form: College of Arts and Sciences Quantitative Summary of Course Evaluations
If the faculty member is granted tenure, this is the faculty member's first year of tenure at Seattle University. If denied tenure, this is the last contract year; those in their last contract year may choose to complete an APR at their discretion.
NOTE: Sabbaticals do not necessarily coincide with being granted tenure or promotion. Sabbaticals require and application and are awarded when the full-time faculty member has “completed at least six full-time years of service” (Faculty Handbook, XIII, pg. 39). In other words, sabbaticals are every seventh year of service.
The University's sabbatical policies are found in the Faculty Handbook, Section XIII, pg. 39. Faculty are awarded a sabbatical every seventh year of service. Eligible faculty will be reminded by the Dean's Office to submit an application. In the College of Arts and Sciences, sabbatical applications are due by November 1st of the year preceding the proposed sabbatical.
Applications may be obtained from the Dean's office or downloaded from Academic Affairs Policies and Procedures. Faculty are required to submit a sabbatical report to the Dean’s Office during the quarter in which they return to teaching.
Seattle University recognizes the importance and commitment of non-tenure track faculty to delivering its mission and values. All faculty, regardless of position, are vital to student success through delivering the highest quality teaching and service and are subject to periodic or annual reviews. There are several official designations for non-tenure track faculty as described in the Faculty Handbook, Section III.C (pg. 10 forward). The first five designations for non-tenure track faculty in the Faculty Handbook: Instructor, Lecturer, Clinical, Professor of Lawyering, and Part-time are discussed in detail in this section.
Non-Tenure-Track Faculty positions in the College of Arts and Sciences are typically Instructors, but also include other position types. See Section III.C (p. 12) of the Faculty Handbookhttps://www.seattleu.edu/academicaffairs/policies/ for details about each of the five Non-tenure-track faculty ranks.
The Faculty Handbook also contains the designations Research, Other Faculty, and Special Status Faculty are discussed in the Faculty Handbook in Sections III.E, F & G, starting on pg. 16.
Each of the ranks have specific guidelines for review, renewal and promotion. Please consult the appropriate area for details. A general overview of the review process is found here [link to filename: FT NTT Annual Review Process]
Instructor review and renewal information can be found here. [internal link TBD]
Lecturer review and renewal information can be found here. [internal linkTBD]
Clinical Professor review, renewal and promotion information can be found here. [internal link TBD]
Other Faculty Designation, including part-time faculty, review information can be found here. [internal link TBD]
In general, the annual review of all full-time faculty includes these basic components: student evaluations of teaching with numeric ratings, self-evaluation letter, and summative letter of review authored by the chair or other faculty member appointed by the dean.
Faculty with single-year appointments are reviewed by means of a letter from their Chairs at the end of the academic year. Please note, that in the situation where there is an acting chair or director, that person or the dean’s designee writes this letter.
First Year for single-year and multi-year faculty: The chairperson's letter should be submitted to the Dean by the third Friday in June.
In preparation for the chair’s review, faculty are asked to submit a one- to two-page self-evaluation on teaching, scholarship (if appropriate), and service, along with a list or table of teaching, scholarly (if appropriate), and service activities performed during the year.
This list or table should include the following:
Departments are encouraged to conduct a formative review at some point during the first year of all multi-year appointments.
Full-time multi-year faculty (e.g. Instructors, Lecturers, and Clinical faculty) are reviewed using the NTT APR after their first year.
Multi-year appointments beyond the first year use the NTT APR as described under the appropriate faculty series.
Faculty in this series are expected to have teaching, advising and service responsibilities. An open search is generally required, and contracts can be issued as single-year or multi-year. An Annual Performance Review is expected. Instructors are eligible to receive Faculty Development Funds from the college and may be elected to serve on college and university level committees. Promotion to Senior Instructor is available to qualified candidates meeting promotion requirements. See Policy on Promotion to Senior Instructor.
Faculty holding rank of Instructor are eligible to apply for promotion to Senior Instructor who customarily hold a terminal degree in their field and who are in their fifth year of service at the rank of Instructor. Files will be submitted simultaneously to the candidate’s home department review committee and the Senior Instructor Promotion Committee according to the timeline. Promotion will be effective the following year. Faculty who do not receive promotion following a review may reapply three years after their denial, as noted in the Faculty Handbook.
To download the Senior Instructor Promotion Policy PDF, click here.
Annual Reviews
As the college and university are committed to excellence in teaching and service, all full-time faculty with the rank of Instructor are reviewed annually according to college policy. Most departments have developed specific policy and guidance on the review of Instructors. Please consult your chair or director for more information.
Download the APR for FT NTT Faculty here. [Link to NTT APR]
Appointment Renewal
Most faculty in this series hold multi-year appointments. In the year prior to renewal of your appointment, please consult with your department chair or director for guidance. Chair’s make recommendations for renewal to the Dean based on curricular need and a candid assessment of the Instructors performance. Typically, after consulting with the Dean and with their approval, the divisional Associate Dean makes a request to the Provost for renewal. Appointments and renewals are subject to approval by the Provost. As stated in the Faculty Handbook (pg. 13), reappointment is contingent on several factors (e.g. performance in teaching and service, enrollment needs, curricular needs, and funding).
Please see college Faculty-and-Staff-Resources pages [need link] for further details.
Faculty in this series primarily engage in teaching and service. Lectures are not expected to perform service beyond the normal advising component associate with the delivery of their courses.
Appointments are generally for one term but may be renewed upon approval of the Dean and Provost. According to the Faculty Handbook, under exceptional circumstances a highly accomplished individual may be appointed as Senior Lecturer. See Faculty Handbook, Section C [section link] (pg. 10 forward) for more information.
More information on the Lecturer Series can be found here [link to Lecturer Orientation doc]
Faculty in this series primarily engage in teaching and service with no expectation of service beyond that associated with student mentoring and advising as part of one’s assigned courses. See Faculty Handbook, Section C (pg. 13) for more information.
Full time lecturers are invited to attend the university's New Faculty Institute and Seminars as well as the College of Arts and Sciences New Faculty Training. The A&S Associate Deans work with the New Faculty Institute to ensure that content overlap is minimal.
Lecturer Series faculty who are serving as academic advisers will work with the Advising Coordinator and/or the department whose majors they are advising to receive ongoing training, mentoring, and supervision.
Departments are encouraged to provide an orientation and mentorship to new non tenure-track faculty. Additional orientations may be required by the university.
Lecturers and Senior Lecturers have a standard workload of seven courses. One or more sevenths of their load may be assigned to advising or to a significant service project, with the approval of the department chair and the appropriate divisional Associate Dean. Expectations for attendance at department meetings, availability to students, and other standard service are customary and are included as part of the compensation stipulated in your appointment contract.
Annual Review:
Full-time non-tenure-track faculty are reviewed on an annual basis at the same time as tenure track faculty in January. All full-time non-tenure-track faculty should have a peer review of teaching during the first year. An annual performance review (NTT APR) must be conducted and submitted to the dean's office by April 1, beginning with the first year of the faculty member's employment at SU.
Lecturers will use the special APR form designed for their use. [link]
Renewal:
Reappointment of a faculty in the Lecturer series is based upon the recommendation for rehiring a faculty member who is in a full-time non-tenure-track position already. The recommendation to rehire must be approved by the department and submitted to the dean's office at the same time as the annual review.
The Chair makes a recommendation for renewal to the Dean based on curricular need and a candid assessment of the Lecturer’s performance. Typically, after consulting with the Dean and with their approval, the divisional Associate Dean makes a request to the Provost for renewal. Appointments and renewals are subject to approval by the Provost. As stated in the Faculty Handbook (pg. 13), reappointment is contingent on several factors (e.g. performance in teaching and service, enrollment needs, curricular needs, and funding).
Clinical Professor Series - Overview
Faculty appointed to the clinical series hold specific skills and training required for the performance of the duties associated with their position. Generally, clinical professors engage in teaching-related activities such as clinical and laboratory instruction or supervision, or other forms of professional instruction. Clinical professors may also have limited scholarly and service expectations. Annual Professional Reviews are required.
NOTE: This series is relatively new to the college and university. Guidelines for review and promotion within this series (Associate Professor and Professor) are being developed at this time. As new policy is approved, this page will be updated and an email containing the policy will be sent to all faculty in the college.
This content is under development and will be added once it is complete.
This content is under development and will be added once it is complete.
The Faculty Handbook lists several other classifications for faculty who are not either tenure-track or considered non-tenure track. Please consult the (starting on pg. 16) for details. In brief, the Other Faculty designations are:
Research Faculty
Other Faculty
Special Status Faculty
If a faculty member wants to make any change to their workload, they must first consult with the department chair.
If a faculty member's workload is to be adjusted by someone outside of the college, the chair must be informed and consulted with first.
(This paragraph added by vote of Executive Committee, June 2005) Update: Adjustments to workload must be approved by the Dean and Provost.
Education Abroad supports faculty and staff in their efforts to create valuable international learning opportunities for Seattle University students. Learn more here.
Salary Equity Appeal Policy
The Dean's office periodically receives requests from individual faculty members to increase their base salaries on the grounds of equity in relation to other members of the College. The "Salary Equity Appeals Process" is intended to strengthen procedural fairness, professionalism in administrative decision-making, and shared governance. Appeals are granted based upon available funds.
Initiating an equity review
A faculty member may initiate an equity review by writing a letter to the Associate Dean requesting a scatter plot. The scatter plot provides data showing salary by time in rank for faculty in disciplines with similar salaries at that rank based on data from the most recently available Benchmark data study (currently 2018).
If, after reviewing the scatter plot, the faculty member determines that their base salary appears to be less than that of others in the College from comparable disciplines who have a similar rank and years of experience, they will send a letter to the Dean and the Equity Appeals Committee making their case.
Review process and criteria
An advisory committee of three tenured faculty members will review any salary equity appeals, and then make a recommendation to the Dean.
An equity appeal could be justified if a faculty member's base salary is less than that of others in the College in comparable fields and having similar rank, years of experience, and career merit in the view of the Equity Appeals Committee, the Dean and the Provost’s Office. Other considerations such as salary compression, comparisons to salaries beyond the College (or beyond the control of the College), or comparisons to a particular individual will not be considered as part of this process. Equity adjustments, if made, will not apply retroactively. Equity appeals will apply to base salary rather than to annual increments. The Equity Appeals Committee makes recommendations to the Dean, who then makes recommendations to the Provost’s Office for final approval or revision.
Timeline:
Request for scatter plots due: November 1
Equity appeals due in the Dean's office: December 1
(Policy last revised: November 8, 2021)
All programs engage in annual assessment projects using their program learning outcomes. These projects are integrated within a multi-year assessment plan, which departments/programs submit to the Assessment Coordinator.
In the College of Arts and Sciences, Susan Meyers of the English Department serves as the college assessment coordinator. Assessment coordinators work on multi-year assessment of department/program learning outcomes. They sit on the University Assessment Committee. The assessment coordinator and Associate Deans serve supporting roles for their divisions and report to the University Assessment Committee.
By September 15, each academic program must submit an annual assessment plan for the upcoming year and a report for the previous year. Information is available here.
Many undergraduate programs in the College of Arts and Sciences offer honors in the major (department honors). These programs offer an opportunity for motivated and capable students to engage in more extensive interaction with faculty and to complete challenging individual research projects that will further their personal professional goals.
Guidelines for Department Honors Programs (Adopted by A&S Curriculum Committee, January 22, 2000)
Admission requirements: In order to be admitted to department/major honors, a student must have both a cumulative and major/program G.P.A. of 3.5. Departments will individually specify any prerequisite courses for admission to department/major honors.
Transcript notation: Students who complete the department/major honors program will receive the honors degree in that discipline. In order to receive this notation, students must not only complete the requisite course work, but must also maintain both a cumulative and major/program G.P.A. of 3.5. In addition, the grade for the course in "Departmental Honors Thesis Supervision" must be at least an A-.
Department Honors (as of September 2019)
"Products required of A&S departmental honors programs (e.g., theses, papers, presentations) are the sole property of the student and authorship should be limited solely to the student. In the tradition of the thesis or dissertation, faculty involvement should be limited to mentoring and guiding the student's independent work. Substantial contributions on the part of the faculty advisor (which might merit dual authorship in alternative situations) should be discouraged." (Adopted in May 2006)
The College offers annual funding to department honors students and events related to department honors programs.
The following funds are available:
This information is available in Faculty Research and Teaching.
This information is available in Faculty Research and Teaching.